> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://oecd-media-support-principles.gfmd.info/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://oecd-media-support-principles.gfmd.info/toolkit/role/policy-officers-thematic-specialists/applying-the-oecd-principles-in-practice.md). # Applying the OECD Principles in practice ### Principle 1: Ensure support does no harm **In practice:**\ Context matters in how policy and thematic approaches define and operationalise support across strategies and guidance. This includes how political pressure, regulatory constraints, and market conditions affecting media actors are recognised and reflected. **If risks specific to media actors are not clearly articulated at policy level, they are unlikely to be consistently addressed in programmes** ([*see case study 5: regulatory risk and political capture in media reform*](/toolkit/case-studies-and-field-insights/case-study-5-regulatory-risk-and-political-capture-in-media-reform.md)).\ This includes how factors such as media regulation, ownership structures, and information control shape the operating environment for independent media. **Do** * Ensure policy frameworks explicitly reflect risks faced by journalists and media organisations, including political, legal, and economic pressures * Integrate media and information ecosystem analysis into country strategies and sectoral frameworks * Reflect differences between open, transitional, and restrictive environments in policy guidance * Encourage the use of partner and field-level insights to inform policy positioning **Avoid** * Treating media support as context-neutral or interchangeable with broader civil society support * Overlooking sector-specific risks such as regulatory capture, ownership concentration, or information manipulation * Assuming that general governance or civil society analysis sufficiently captures media dynamics * Applying uniform policy approaches across contexts without differentiation **Consider** * Whether policy frameworks distinguish between media actors and other civil society organisations * How political and regulatory risks are reflected in thematic priorities * The implications of misreading the media environment for programme design ### Principle 2: Increase financial and other forms of support **In practice:**\ Policy framing shapes whether media and information integrity are recognised as strategic priorities within funding frameworks and instruments. This includes how clearly these priorities are linked to governance, security, and development outcomes. **If media support is not clearly positioned within funding logic, it is unlikely to be prioritised in resource allocation.**\ This includes how funding approaches account for the economic realities of media markets, including sustainability challenges, revenue constraints, and reliance on external support. **Do** * Position media and information integrity as relevant to core policy priorities, including governance, stability, and resilience * Ensure that policy guidance is reflected in funding frameworks, calls, and eligibility criteria * Align thematic priorities with existing instruments to enable practical uptake * Support the inclusion of media-related objectives across sectors, rather than in standalone programmes only **Avoid** * Treating media support as a niche or standalone issue disconnected from broader funding priorities * Developing policy priorities that are not reflected in available instruments or calls * Using overly narrow or technical framing that limits cross-sector relevance * Assuming that recognition at policy level will automatically translate into funding **Consider** * Whether existing instruments are sufficiently flexible to support media-related objectives * How policy priorities influence what programme officers can realistically fund or design * Trade-offs between strategic ambition and instrument constraints ### Principle 3: Take a whole-of-system approach **In practice:**\ Policy approaches shape whether support reflects the full media and information ecosystem, including content production, infrastructure, regulation, and audience dynamics. This requires recognising how these elements interact across sectors. **Without system-level framing, policy risks reinforcing fragmented or partial interventions** ([see case study 4: governance risk and the role of media oversight in infrastructure investments](/toolkit/case-studies-and-field-insights/case-study-4-governance-risk-and-the-role-of-media-oversight-in-infrastructure-investments.md)).\ This includes how information is produced, distributed, and consumed, and how digital platforms, regulatory frameworks, and market conditions influence these dynamics. **Do** * Reflect the interconnections between media, digital platforms, governance systems, and regulatory environments * Integrate media considerations into related sectors such as digital policy, anti-corruption, public administration, and competition policy * Ensure thematic guidance captures both content and enabling environment dimensions * Encourage cross-sector approaches that reflect how information flows in practice **Avoid** * Focusing policy frameworks only on media content or individual actors * Taking into account structural factors such as infrastructure, regulation, or market conditions only partially or inconsistently * Treating media support as separate from digital or governance agendas * Designing policy approaches that assign responsibility for media-related issues to a single sector or team, limiting cross-sector engagement **Consider** * Whether policy frameworks enable programme officers to address interconnections across sectors * How policy areas such as digital regulation, competition policy, governance reform, and public administration influence media viability and independence * Risks of duplication or gaps where links between different parts of the media ecosystem (e.g. regulation, funding, distribution) are not recognised ### Principle 4: Strengthen local leadership and ownership **In practice:**\ Policy decisions influence how local actors are positioned within media ecosystems, including whether they are recognised as independent actors or primarily as implementers of externally defined priorities. **Policy frameworks that do not clearly account for local agency risk undermining both credibility and effectiveness.**\ This includes how local media, journalist networks, and support organisations contribute to content production, distribution, and public trust. **Do** * Reflect the role of local media actors, networks, and support organisations in policy frameworks * Encourage approaches that allow local actors to shape priorities and strategies * Ensure that thematic guidance recognises diversity within the media sector, including smaller or emerging actors * Support policy approaches that reinforce editorial independence **Avoid** * Designing policy frameworks that implicitly prioritise external actors or models * Treating local organisations primarily as delivery partners * Overlooking local perspectives in defining priorities or success criteria * Applying uniform approaches to ownership and participation **Consider** * How policy frameworks influence who sets priorities and narratives * Trade-offs between accountability requirements and local ownership * The impact of policy choices on perceived independence of media actors ### Principle 5: Improve coordination of support **In practice:**\ Policy and thematic guidance influence how coordination is structured, incentivised, and implemented across institutions and donors. This includes whether existing coordination mechanisms are used and how roles are defined. **Without clear policy direction, coordination often remains ad-hoc and dependent on individual initiative** ([*see case study 7: coordination challenges and joint responses in crisis contexts*](/toolkit/case-studies-and-field-insights/case-study-7-coordination-challenges-and-joint-responses-in-crisis-contexts.md)).\ This includes coordination across donors, sectors, and instruments addressing media, digital governance, and information integrity. **Do** * Reference and promote the use of existing coordination mechanisms and platforms where they exist * Align thematic priorities with those of other donors and institutional actors where appropriate * Clarify roles and responsibilities across teams, instruments, and partners * Encourage information sharing and joint approaches in policy guidance **Avoid** * Limiting coordination to informal or voluntary engagement * Overlooking existing coordination structures or mechanisms * Creating parallel or competing priorities across policy areas * Assuming coordination will happen without clear incentives or expectations **Consider** * Which coordination mechanisms already exist and how they are used in practice * Criteria for when coordination or joint approaches are appropriate * Trade-offs between coordination, visibility, and flexibility ### Principle 6: Invest in knowledge, research, and learning **In practice:**\ Policy approaches depend on how evidence and knowledge about media ecosystems are generated and used. Consultations indicate that available data is often uneven or incomplete, particularly in rapidly evolving information environments. **Policy decisions made without sufficient sector-specific knowledge risk misalignment with actual media dynamics.**\ This includes understanding audience trust, information consumption patterns, and the role of digital platforms in shaping public discourse. **Do** * Integrate media-specific data and analysis into policy development and thematic guidance * Support the generation and use of evidence on media markets, audiences, and information flows * Encourage feedback loops between policy, programming, and local actors * Promote learning across sectors and instruments **Avoid** * Relying solely on general governance or civil society data * Applying generic assumptions across different media environments * Treating knowledge as static rather than evolving * Failing to incorporate lessons from implementation into policy updates **Consider** * What evidence is available - and where gaps remain * How uncertainty affects policy choices and prioritisation * How learning can be systematically integrated into policy processes